San Jose: Police apologize for drone secrecy, promise transparency

SAN JOSE -- After wide criticism by civil liberties groups and national media over its secretive purchase of a drone, the San Jose Police Department is apologizing and promises to gather community input before it uses or even tests the device.

Police brass released a statement Tuesday reiterating that its January purchase of the drone -- a two-foot-wide, camera-equipped Century Neo 660 six-rotor hobbyist flying device and the first among Bay Area police agencies -- was aimed at helping bomb technicians access areas where a robot couldn't go.

But the department also apologized for quietly applying for federal grant funds to buy the drone and slipping the purchase into a November City Council consent agenda item that elicited no public discussion. The ACLU accused the department of sidestepping the kind of political scrutiny that torpedoed other Bay Area agencies' attempts to get a drone.

"In hindsight, SJPD should have done a better job of communicating the purpose and acquisition of the UAS (Unmanned Aerial System) device to our community," the department statement read. "The community should have the opportunity to provide feedback, ask questions, and express their concerns before we move forward with this project. To this end, we will first develop a community outreach plan before we take steps to deploy the UAS."

Advertisement

Police spokesman Albert Morales said there was no specific timetable for its community outreach regarding the drone, but that it would be completed before any testing or use of the $7,000 device, which is grounded anyway pending Federal Aviation Administration clearance.

Morales said the drone is "not going to fly until we get all that input from all the stakeholders," including the ACLU and anyone else who might want to comment.

The statement does say the drone might be used for "situations that threaten public safety. These could include dangers such as active shooters, hostage taking, or other such tactical situations where lives might be in immediate danger."

That sort of latitude is what has critics up in arms, voicing fears that while the original intent may be for bomb-squad callouts, the kinds of uses could expand rapidly and devolve into warrantless surveillance without clear, defined restrictions for its use.

The department's quiet pursuit of the drone surfaced after persistent records requests by the online public-records watchdog MuckRock and Vice, leading to the release of records about the drone in July, nearly six months after the purchase.

Ozer said that instead of gathering input about appropriate uses for the drone, the police department and City Council need to convene what should have been initial public discussions about a police drone's existence altogether in the city.

"The fact that the drone was purchased without the public knowing about it, we shouldn't move forward," Ozer said. "They should go back to the drawing board and the question should be about whether a drone is ever used in San Jose."